AIR QUALITY: LIMIT VALUES FOR BENZENE
AND CARBON MONOXIDE
(a)
(19802)
5518/99
COM(98)591
(b)
(21181)
7906/00
COM(00) 223
|
Draft Council Directive relating to limit values for benzene and carbon
monoxide in ambient air.
Amended draft Council Directive relating to limit values for benzene
and carbon monoxide in ambient air
|
| Legal base:
| Article 175 EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Document originated:
| (b) 11 April 2000
|
| Forwarded to the Council:
| (b) 13 April 2000
|
| Deposited in Parliament:
| (b) 2 May 2000
|
| Department: |
Environment, Transport and the Regions
|
| Basis of consideration:
| (both) EM of 11 May 2000
|
| Previous Committee Report:
| (a) HC 34-xvii (1998-99), paragraph 5 (28 April 1999) and
HC 34-xxix (1998-99), paragraph 7 (27 October 1999)
(b) None
|
| To be discussed in Council:
| No date set |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important
|
| Committee's decision:
| (a) Cleared (decision already reported 27 October 1999)
(b) Cleared
|
Background
10.1 Council Directive 96/62/EC[15]
sets out a framework for Community air quality policy, and lays
down a timetable for "daughter" legislation to establish
ambient air quality standards for 12 individual pollutants (including
benzene and carbon monoxide, which are the subject of the present
document).
10.2 As we noted in our Report of 28 April
1999, benzene is a carcinogen, for which there is no safe threshold,
and where the Commission has therefore concluded that a precautionary
approach should be adopted, with the aim of making exposure as
low as reasonably achievable. On the other hand, although carbon
monoxide can be lethal indoors, outdoor concentrations are much
lower, and there are known threshold levels below which no effects
are observed. In commenting on the actual limit values in the
proposal, our Report also noted both the major qualifications
surrounding the Commission's accompanying analyses and the very
great extent to which, at Community level, the projected costs
appeared to outweigh the expected benefits, particularly for benzene.
10.3 These concerns were addressed in a
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 28 July 1999 from the
then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department
of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr Meale), which
pointed out that, as a result of measures taken since the Commission
had prepared its cost benefit analyses, it was now unlikely that
the value limits proposed for these two pollutants would be exceeded,
and that in particular the controls were thus unlikely to give
rise to costs or benefits in the UK. In view of this, we cleared
the document at our meeting on 27 October 1999, but asked the
Government to comment on what the proposal was likely to achieve
in practice, and on whether more stringent limit values might
not have been put forward.
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 11 May
2000
10.4 The Commission has now put forward
an amended proposal for the draft Directive incorporating several
of the amendments proposed by the European Parliament. These changes
mainly clarify the provisions and do not affect the requirements
set out in the draft Directive.
10.5 In his Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum
of 11 May 2000, the current Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State
at the Department (Mr Hill) says that the UK's primary consideration
has been to ensure that the agreed limits are compatible with
its national air quality objectives for these pollutants. He goes
on to point out that the objectives in the UK 1997 National Air
Quality Strategy have since been tightened in the Air Quality
Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland published
in January this year. Thus, the objectives for benzene (16.25mg/m3
as a running annual mean) and for carbon monoxide (11.76mg/m3
as a running 8 hour mean) will now have to be met in 2003 rather
than 2005, and the Government has stated its longer term policy
of reducing benzene levels still further (to 3.25mg/m3
by the end of 2005). He adds that these objectives will be met
through a combination of action at European, national and local
levels, and that it seems that existing policy measures will enable
the UK to comply with the limit values at virtually all sites.
He says that the Government therefore considers that it has achieved
its negotiating objectives, and that the fact these proposals
have no additional costs or benefits for the UK reflects the high
level of protection already offered by national policy, rather
than a lack of ambition in the negotiations.
Conclusion
10.6 We are grateful to the Minister
for this further explanation, which does not of course affect
our earlier clearance of document (a). We now also clear document
(b).
15 OJ No. L 296, 21.11.96, p.55. Back
|
